Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   NZ Computing (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f47-nz-computing.html)
-   -   Which is faster? (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t578108-which-is-faster.html)

Deck 03-15-2006 10:29 PM

Which is faster?
 
Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)

vs

Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )



The Other Guy 03-15-2006 10:32 PM

Re: Which is faster?
 
Deck wrote:
> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>
> vs
>
> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )


This cannot be answered without more information. It depends what you
are doing, and other factors such as the chipsets with which these
processors are paired.

The Other Guy

Deck 03-15-2006 10:43 PM

Re: Which is faster?
 

"The Other Guy" <tog@null.test> wrote in message
news:gC0Sf.6442$JZ1.210632@news.xtra.co.nz...
> Deck wrote:
>> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>>
>> vs
>>
>> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )

>
> This cannot be answered without more information. It depends what you are
> doing, and other factors such as the chipsets with which these processors
> are paired.
>
> The Other Guy


well, specifically i'm trying to compare these two:

http://www.pbtech.co.nz/index.php?item=NBKTOS7073
http://www.pbtech.co.nz/index.php?item=NBKHNB4108

no gaming, just for programming.



Have A Nice Cup of Tea 03-15-2006 10:53 PM

Re: Which is faster?
 
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:29:55 +1300, Deck wrote:

> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>
> vs
>
> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )


Well...

The first of the two has a faster CPU, but a slower FSB.

The second of the two has a slower CPU and a faster FSB.

If you are genuinely wanting a machine that can do more work, then why are
you not considering AMD processors? They are by far the most productive on
the market at the moment.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.


The Other Guy 03-15-2006 11:15 PM

Re: Which is faster?
 
Deck wrote:
> "The Other Guy" <tog@null.test> wrote in message
> news:gC0Sf.6442$JZ1.210632@news.xtra.co.nz...
>> Deck wrote:
>>> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )

>> This cannot be answered without more information. It depends what you are
>> doing, and other factors such as the chipsets with which these processors
>> are paired.
>>
>> The Other Guy

>
> well, specifically i'm trying to compare these two:
>
> http://www.pbtech.co.nz/index.php?item=NBKTOS7073
> http://www.pbtech.co.nz/index.php?item=NBKHNB4108


I am a programmer myself, and almost purchased a Presario last year. I
didn't in the end because I couldn't get one, instead purchasing a
smaller MSI notebook (12.1").

Assuming you're going to be doing straight C compilation, neither will
likely perform significantly better than the other. Both have 5400 RPM
drives, but I'd favour the higher memory speed on the Duo however. From
my experience, cache and memory performance are significant factors in
compilation speed.

The Other Guy

Deck 03-15-2006 11:23 PM

Re: Which is faster?
 

"Have A Nice Cup of Tea" <c@t.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.03.15.22.53.36.968961@s.co...
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:29:55 +1300, Deck wrote:
>
>> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>>
>> vs
>>
>> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )

>
> Well...
>
> The first of the two has a faster CPU, but a slower FSB.
>
> The second of the two has a slower CPU and a faster FSB.
>
> If you are genuinely wanting a machine that can do more work, then why are
> you not considering AMD processors? They are by far the most productive on
> the market at the moment.
>
>
> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>
> --
> 1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is
> forever.
> 2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
> 3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.
>


ok, which AMD notebook would you recommend that's
got more grunt in the same price range, 2500ish ?



Have A Nice Cup of Tea 03-16-2006 12:07 AM

Re: Which is faster?
 
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 12:23:08 +1300, Deck wrote:

>
> "Have A Nice Cup of Tea" <c@t.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.03.15.22.53.36.968961@s.co...
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:29:55 +1300, Deck wrote:
>>
>>> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )

>>
>> Well...
>>
>> The first of the two has a faster CPU, but a slower FSB.
>>
>> The second of the two has a slower CPU and a faster FSB.
>>
>> If you are genuinely wanting a machine that can do more work, then why are
>> you not considering AMD processors? They are by far the most productive on
>> the market at the moment.

>
> ok, which AMD notebook would you recommend that's
> got more grunt in the same price range, 2500ish ?


I wasn't commenting on "notebooks" - I was commenting on CPUs. Your
question was about CPU and FSB speeds was it not?

But generally, I would say if you are concerned about "grunt" then you
should not be concerned about price. If you are concerned about price,
then you should not be concerned about "grunt".

But that said, I would have thought that "grunt" is something that you'd
be more likely to find at a rugby match than in a computer store, unless
you come across a particularly noisy shop assistant when lifting a heavy
box. ;o)


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is forever.
2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.


SNOman 03-16-2006 03:07 AM

Re: Which is faster?
 
Deck wrote:
> "Have A Nice Cup of Tea" <c@t.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.03.15.22.53.36.968961@s.co...
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:29:55 +1300, Deck wrote:
>>
>>> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>>>
>>> vs
>>>
>>> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )

>> Well...
>>
>> The first of the two has a faster CPU, but a slower FSB.
>>
>> The second of the two has a slower CPU and a faster FSB.
>>
>> If you are genuinely wanting a machine that can do more work, then why are
>> you not considering AMD processors? They are by far the most productive on
>> the market at the moment.
>>
>>
>> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>>
>> --
>> 1/ Migration to Linux only costs money once. Higher Windows TCO is
>> forever.
>> 2/ "Shared source" is a poison pill. Open Source is freedom.
>> 3/ Only the Windows boxes get the worms.
>>

>
> ok, which AMD notebook would you recommend that's
> got more grunt in the same price range, 2500ish ?
>
>

I've got an HP NX6125 for around $2200 +GST from memory

64 bit capable 2.2GHZ

Dave Taylor 03-16-2006 05:38 AM

Re: Which is faster?
 
"Deck" <d@d.com> wrote in news:dva4h2$3u9$1@emma.aioe.org:

> Intel Pentium M processor 760 (2.0GHz, 2Mb L2 cache, 533MHz FSB)
>
> vs
>
> Intel Core Duo Proc T2300 (1.66GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 667MHz FSB )
>
>


The one that has the fastest hard drive.


--
Ciao, Dave


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.